The battle's done, and we kind of won, so we sound our victory cheer: where do we go from here?
... a blog by Marc Lynch

July 10, 2007

Talking about Jordan

I had a great time last night drinking adult
beverages with a collection of Jordanian academics and journalists, whose identities don't need to be divulged here but who certainly do not agree on all things political.
Every one of them thought that a Jordanian return to the West Bank
would spell doom for King Abdullah. One thought that the security
services and mukhabarat would be enough to keep control, but by the end
even this one was angrily saying that Jordanians should be out in the streets right now protesting against a confederation before it's too late. This is consistent with almost all of the comments and emails I received from Jordanians the last time I wrote warning against the reappearance of the "Jordan option". It also is consistent with the overwhelming consensus of Jordanian
journalists, intellectuals and politicians, and almost all published op-eds over the last month. It's also consistent with the recently, very forcefully restated rejection of the idea by King
Abdullah. And don't even get me started on the Islamists...

The Transjordanian nationalist Nahid Hattar complained the other day
that Jordan's political consensus against confederation with the West
Bank was its best defense against plans to solve the Palestinian issue at Jordan's expense, but that this consensus wasn't enough because nobody really takes Jordanian public
opinion seriously. It really is quite astonishing the extent to which discussion of this Jordanian option continues in American and Israeli
circles. Even some Palestinians seem open to the idea - not just the
aging remnants of the pre-67 era... I have it on some authority that
Mahmoud Abbas is increasingly open to the idea because he fears that
Fatah will soon lose the West Bank to Hamas without a Jordanian
liferaft. And so trial balloons keep going up, despite a virtually
unanimous Jordanian consensus against it.

Batir Wardum, a very smart Jordanian writer who often takes (thoughtful, polite, and very welcome) issue with my pessimism about Jordanian politics, commented in the course of defending Jordan's stability that "The only fear for Jordan is for the USA to exert pressure on the King
to act as Israel's gate keeper in the west bank which will polarize the
Jordanian populations." I basically agree with that. If the US is stupid enough to force the West Bank onto Abdullah - who probably would not be able to say no to his primary constituency, should it come to that - then I think Jordan is probably doomed. It's really up to the United States to make sure that it does not come to that - folks, this is not the time to try and play a longshot.

Oh, by the way, here's a question which came up, which honestly hadn't even occurred to me despite all my famous Jordan pessimism. A few years ago, King Abdullah removed Hussein's son Hamza from the line of succession (despite what were supposed to have been promises to the contrary). To the best of my knowledge (and that of my Jordanian friends last night), he has not since announced any formal successor. So what happens if Abdullah takes a bullet, or chokes on a chicken bone, or has a heart attack, or has his plane shot down as he visits Amman? Why is there no Crown Prince - or is there? Who exactly would navigate Jordan through the succession crisis which would follow? Abdullah's thirteen year old son? Rania? Mohamed Dahabi? Ambassador Hale?

Comments

I think the title "Crown Prince" is used only when the King wishes his successor to be a brother rather than his eldest son. While a Royal Decree at any time can change everything, as might the Army in a time of crisis, it would seem that legally Abdullah's son is automatically successor (with a Regent, appointed by the Council of Ministers if the King didn't leave one, filling in until prince is 18).

==
CHAPTER FOUR: The Executive Power, Part I
The King and His Prerogatives, Article 28

The Throne of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan is hereditary to the dynasty of King Abdullah Ibn Al-Hussein in a direct line through his male heirs as provided hereinafter:

(a) * The Royal title shall pass from the holder of the Throne to his eldest son, and to the eldest son of that son and in linear succession by a similar process thereafter. Should the eldest son die before the Throne devolves upon him, his eldest son shall inherit the Throne, despite the existence of brothers to the deceased son. The King may, however, select one of his brothers as heir apparent. In this event, title to the Throne shall pass to him from the holder of the Throne.

* As amended in the Official Gazette No. 1831 of 1/4/1965

(g) The King attains his majority upon the completion of his eighteenth year according to the lunar calendar. If the Throne devolves upon a person who is below this age, the powers of the King shall be exercised by a Regent or Council of Regency, who shall have been appointed by a Royal Decree by the reigning King. If the King dies without making such nomination, the Council of Ministers shall appoint the Regent or Council of Regency.

Few Months ago,An Israeli General concluded that Abdullaha will be the the last hashemite,I as Jordanian,would like to see him removed by the people of Jordan because we deserve better.
Over the last several years ,he has sold every public sector to Foreign investment groups that left the country virtually owned by some sleazy foreign investment and their only objective is to maximize their profit,while our people are suffering under his pathetic rules.

It is an interesting topic, let’s hope common sense prevails
on the succession point, constitutionally Waleed is obviously right, However the Political / Royal / Military dynamics within Jordan guarantee if this happened anytime soon there is no doubt it will be Hamzeh, the only goal removing him can achieve is to make it possible for it to be otherwise in the distant future.

Nice stuff... tough to keep track of all that is happening. I end up reading 100 odd blogs daily. Plus there is news. You could also enrich your blog by adding current news on your blog... try out the news widget from widgetmate.com

What I truley care about is the silly idea that some people are propagating, as if the palestinians want to be in a confederation with jordan, who said they wanted it, did anyone ask them? Or is this the attitude that people generally have towards palestinians? Like they are simply meant to be occupied and dominated:
ottomans-british-zionists-.................

Funny how you describe as a "smart Jordanian" one of the most despised Jordanian bloggers, Batir Wardum, who is considered a mouthpiece for the Jordanian repressive regime. I guess this is consistent with the Axis of Moderates line of thinking.

Samara, thanks for the link to Shifaa... I never would have seen it otherwise since I've never heard of the blog, and the post didn't show up as a comment, trackback, or any hits. Didn't find his/her post very interesting (the comments were more entertaining, though)... I love it when people argue about substance, but uninformed personal abuse bores me, and Shifaa didn't seem to understand what I wrote. I don't much care about the views of someone who can't be bothered to do the most basic research to find out what I might have written about Jordan before. It isn't that hard...

Ali - I disagree with Batir about most everything politically (which is obviously why I quoted him agreeing with me), but he is smart. Again, I don't mind people who disagree with me. And again, basic research goes a long way: it isn't hard to find out my views on the whole 'Axis of Moderates' thing - which I called in one article the "Axis of Pro-American Dictators."

To the contrary Marc, I think that Shifa raised few issues that are worth discussng. Do not you think that the people of the ME are more interested in economic advances and law and order over the form of the political system whether it was democracy or autocracy or whatever?!

Stability and unifiying figure not bad ideas after all. A strong unifying and central figure who can give a limited democracy that ensures the protection of human rights might be an option that we all have missed. Jordan certainly is an interesting case, do not you think so?

semsem, what protection of human rights in jordan with 30% poverty? 1 of 3 jordanians are starving. how is that protecting human rights? do you even read HRW and AI reports about jordan? you make up myths and you believe them.

Where did you get your numbers? Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon have democratized governments! What are the poverty level in those countries? There is no correlation between democracy and economic benefits? This is the myth that you want to believe in

Samara -guess I forgot about it, sorry. I used to keep up with Jordanian blogs via Jordan Planet... since it closed down I've lost track of a lot of them.

Semsem - lighten up! It's not like you made any serious comment to which I could have responded.

On the stability vs democracy question, everyone's got a right to their own opinion. But I've seen Arab regimes justify their misrule with the "stability" argument for far too many years - and with so little to show for it by way of economic development or political progress as to render the argument a bitter joke.

Everyone else feel free to carry on, no more comments from me in this thread.

Its funny how people in Jordan are under the illusion that they are witnessing economic growth. They seem to believe that opening up a couple of malls and a few starbucks here and there means economic growth, a simple peak at the statistics will show a different picture. 15% unemployment (30% estimated by external sources) compare that to the occupied west back(20-23%) thats pretty nasty don't you think, a look at the GDP-GNP, per capita income ($1700) will complete the true picture of "economic growth" and "stability" in Jordan. I am married to am East bank Jordanian, so when we are in gatherings,occasionally, I sneak a peak at some of what the general mood is with both sides, its not good, I haven't seen so much tension between East and West. So I do not understand why some Jordanians seem to be advocating the stability before democracy approach, what have they seen to support their idea, stability in Jordan today is a myth, its not there, I fear that one day the lid will blow off and the whole can of worms will come oozing out, it wont take much,

Let me give you an example in the form of a joke making the rounds recently:

A Salti ( person from Salt) had 50 Dinars deducted from his salary to support the Palestinian cause, he was so frustrated, he donated the rest of his salary to Israel.

Abu Ard, the Jordanians who gloat about economic growth are telling you the truth, some what. There is economic growth in their bank accounts, but for every corrupt Jordanian whose loyalty was subsidized by a regime bribe, hundreds have to go hungry. So your Jordanian pals are not delusional, just pure scum. Their job is to master Liberalspeak and spread in various Western social and cultural circles and praise the wisdom and progress of the regime (x-commie style). Not a conspiracy, but simply like-minded Jordanian scum whose purpose in life is to protect their turf, even if 30% of Jordanians (who are often described by the regime as lazy) have to starve. We call those western-educated Jordanians whose job is to protect and rationalize the rotten status quo "neo-liberals. "

I like the term neo-liberal. As each one of you comment about Jordan along with the author of this blog who enriched us with the story about the king getting chocked with a piece of bone, I find myself required to respond about about Jordan. Markus, you cracked me up with your figures about unemployment and the decline in economy.
In a matter of fact, last year the Jordanian economcy has witnessed another solid econmoci growth (6%)which is by the way higher than the American economy. So let me enlighten you brother. Instead of sitting around listening to old people talking about politics and consipracy theory of how America is putting us down. You might want to check reliable resources(http://www.banqueaudi.com/geteconomy/jordan/Jordan_economic_report.pdf.)
The figures in the yearly report of 2006 is outstanding and Jordan is one of the few success story in our volatile region. With no natural resources and three civil wars on each of its borders, the kingdom is moving forward beyond its expectation. Areas of construction, banking and toursim particulalry are booming.

I didn't understand how the removal of Prince Hamza as Crown Prince is connected to the "Jordan Option"?
Anyway, what the constitution dictates is clear; Prince Hussein (Abdullah's eldest son) will become King, before his eighteenth year there will be a regent or a regency council, as it was in 1951, and the Jordanian Regime at that time was less stable than now.
Oh by the way, I can't see any link between the Crown Prince dilemma and the confederation.
Another thing: you've said that the Jordan Option is discussed in American and Israeli circles, well don't say this with a loud voice: it will let the few people (I can assure they're very few in Jordan) who want confederation change their ideas.

Ali Daaja you are free to despise me as much as you want, but look..I am not the mouthpieace of anyone. You can disagree with me which is a fundamental right but you have no right to accuse me of being a mouthpiece.

Issa,
This post was a collection of incoherent thoughts. What is the relationship between Hamzah and Jordan option? None. Marc thinks that there was no substance in Shifaa's post which was a reponse to his means that his post has no substance to start with!
Batir, do not worry about this guy. I am a fan of yours. Keep on writing and enlightening us